KUNJAPPA Vs. STATE OF KERALA

JUDGEMENT

(1.) Petitioners are teachers working in the school managed by the 4th respondent. The challenge in this original petition by these teachers is against the constitutional validity of R.45 of Chap.14A of K.E.R, to the extent it has granted a preferential claim to graduate teachers for appointment to the post of Headmasters in an aided U.P. School.

(2.) The qualification held by the petitioners according to the averments in the original petition, are S.S.L.C. and T.T.C. Petitioners contend that they are fully qualified to hold the post of U.P. School Assistants in view of the provisions contained under R.3 of Ch. XXXI of K.E.R. It is further alleged in the original petition that respondents 5 and 6, who are working as U.P. School Assistants in the school managed by the 4th respondent are not having the qualification of S.S.L.C. and T.T.C. but they hold the qualification of graduation with B.Ed. For the purpose of adjudicating the issues raised in this original petition, it is not necessary to embark on an enquiry as to how respondents 5 and 6 were happened to be appointed as U.P. School Assistants, if they were not having the qualification of S.S.L.C. or T.T.C. as there is no challenge against their appointment as U.P.S.A. in this original petition. Under Ch. III, no provision is made prescribing the qualification for appointment to the post of Headmaster in U.P. School. But, from a reading of R.45 Ch. XIV-A, it is discernible that even a teacher having the qualification of graduation with B.Ed, is entitled to be appointed as Headmaster in U.P. School. R.45 of Ch. XIV-A reads as follows:

(3.) The attack made by the petitioners against R.45 is twofold. Firstly, it is contended that since the basic qualifications for appointment to the post of U.P. School Assistant is S.S.L.C. with T.T.C., no teacher without such qualification can be appointed as Headmaster of the U.P. School. The petitioners rely on the decision of this Court in O.P. 2193/82, confirmed in W.A. 137/88 in support of their contention. Secondly, it is contended that a classification based on a higher qualification of B.Ed. degree is arbitrary and it violates the equality clause contained under Art.14 of the Constitution. According to the petitioners, when teachers with S.S.L.C. and T.T.C. are found qualified for promotion to the post of Headmaster, there is no justification for giving a preference to the graduate teachers with B.Ed. degree.